Publication activity of chief and consultant general/visceral surgeons in German university hospitals\u2014a ten-year analysis

Eva C Böckmann,R T Grundmann,E S Debus

doi:10.1007/s00423-021-02241-6

Abstract

PurposeThe publication activity of 38 German general/visceral surgery university departments, documented by first or last authorship from staff surgeons (chief and consultants), was evaluated.MethodsThe observation period extended from 2007 to 2017 and all PubMed-listed publications were considered. Impact factor (IF) was evaluated through the publishing journal’s 5-year IF in 2016, as was the IF for each individual publication. Ranking was expressed in quartiles.ResultsThe staff surgeons of the 38 departments comprised 442 surgeons, of which only 351 (79.4%) were active as first or last authors. Four thousand six hundred and ninety-nine publications published in 702 journals were recorded. The four leading departments in publication number published as much as the last 20 departments (1330 vs. 1336 publications, respectively). The mean of the first (most active) department quartile was 19.6 publications, the second 15.4, the third 11.0, and the last quartile 7.6 per publishing surgeon. The total cumulative impact factor was 14,130. When examining the mean number of publications per publishing surgeons per the 10 year period, the mean of the first quartile was 57.9 cumulative IF, the second 45.0, the third 29.5, and the fourth quartile 17.1. With 352 (7.5%) publications, the most frequently used journal was Chirurg, followed by Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery with 274 (5.8%) publications. Pancreas-related topics led in terms of publication number and IF generated per individual publication.ConclusionA significant difference in publication performance of individual departments was apparent that cannot be explained by staff number. This indicates that there are as yet unknown factors responsible for minor publication activity in many university departments.

Highlights

Reputation and funding of university hospital departments increasingly depends on publication performance
Considerable difference in the publication performance of individual departments has been demonstrated by Putzer et al [1] in the field of anesthesiology with a non-anonymized ranking of 45 university hospital departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland between 2001 and 2010
The publication performance of staff surgeons consisting of the chief and consultants of all 38 German general and visceral surgery university departments was recorded

Summary

Introduction

Reputation and funding of university hospital departments increasingly depends on publication performance. Considerable difference in the publication performance of individual departments has been demonstrated by Putzer et al [1] in the field of anesthesiology with a non-anonymized ranking of 45 university hospital departments in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland between 2001 and 2010. Perhaps because contentious discourse about causal factors could have been sharpened, and because the study did not take hospital structure or employee number into account. The present study was designed to investigate the publication activity in German university visceral surgery. The intent was to investigate whether, as suspected by Putzer et al [1], publication performance primarily depends on the size of the department, or to whether performance relies on preferentially used journals for publishing, or if the publication topic is a deciding factor in performance

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion